[Not earlier than 1902 — not later than January 1903]¹

Stumpfe. On the competitiveness of small and medium landownership compared with large. R. R. 2350. "Agricultural annuals of Thiel," 1896, vol. 25.

Stumpfe begins directly by saying that if large-scale farming were as much superior to small-scale farming as it is in industry, then the law on the colonization of East Prussia would be an error, and the social democrats would be right (p. 58).

According to data from 1882, medium-sized farms (10-100 ha!!) = 12.4% of farms and 47.6% of land — "the great economic importance of the peasantry" (58).

9 farms [Large and medium — records were kept. Small farms — "the strongest distrust" p. 59].

Group I. Glogau district — "sandy soil," rye and potatoes.
Group II. Neumark and Breslau — "good soil, sugar beet cultivation," very intensive.
Group III. Liegnitz — lesser intensity, "enhanced root crop cultivation."

[TABLE A (Stumpfe)*

I. GROUP
Soil quality classification, class, hectares | Sowing, hectares | Yields per morgen in centners: Rye, Potatoes | Head of livestock: Horses, Cattle

Large enterprise (1892-3 years): 1,033 | V-52 VI-203 VII-198 VIII-23 (1,903 morgens) | 7.5 | 23 + 170

Medium enterprise: 21.25 | ? almost the same land See note No. 1 | Oats: 7.5 | 2 + (+ 6 pigs)

Small enterprise: 11.25 | V-0.6 VI-3. VII-3.0 VIII-3 | [?] 5.25 | 1 + (+ 4 pigs)

Large enterprise (1892-3 years): 471.5 | I-212.5 II-120.5 III-59.0 | 3613/4 | 10.7 Beets Wheat 12.75 | 30 + 180 (111 sheep**)

Medium enterprise: 51.5 | III-25 IV-13 V-4 VI-0.75 | 47.5 | 8.0 Beets Wheat 11.3 | 6 + (14 pigs)

Small enterprise: 8.5 | II-1 III-4 IV-3.5 | 7.5 | ? | 0 + (6 pigs)

Large enterprise (1893-4): [?] | [?] | [?] | 29 + 173 [324 sheep [47 pigs

Medium enterprise: 40.75 | III-11.5 IV-22.05 V-3.5 | 37.25 | ? | 7 + 29 [19 pigs

Small enterprise: 8.0 | III-3.00 IV-1.75 V-2.00 | 7.75 | ? | [?]

The following tables A in the manuscript occupy two unnumbered pages, on both sides of a leaf inserted between the 1st and 2nd numbered pages of the manuscript. —Ed.

This figure in parentheses means only the increase in the number of sheep for 1892-93, while the actual number of sheep on July 1, 1893 = 446 sheep (see Stumpfe's article, p. 68). —Ed.]

[TABLE D (Stumpfe)*

I GROUP
Total land, hectares | Soil quality classification, class, hectares | Sowing, hectares | Yields per morgen in centners: rye, potatoes | Head of livestock: horses, cattle

Large enterprise (1892-3 years): 1,033 | V-52 VI-203 VII-198 VIII-23 (1,903 morgens) | 7.5 | 23 + 170

Medium enterprise: 21.25 | ? almost the same land See note No. 1 | Oats: 7.5 | 2 + (+ 6 pigs)

Small enterprise: 11.25 | V-0.25 VI-3. VII-3.50 VIII-3 | 5.25 | ? | 1 + (+ 4 pigs)

Large enterprise (1892-3 years): 471.5 | I-212.5 II-120.5 III-59.0 | 36 13/4 | 10.7 beets, wheat 12.75 | 30 + 180 (111 sheep**)

Medium enterprise: 51.5 | III-25 IV-13 V-4 VI-0.75 | 47.5 | 8.0 beets, wheat 11.3 | 6 + 29 (14 pigs)

Small enterprise: 8.5 | II-1 III-4 IV-3.5 | 7.5 | [?] | 0 + (6 pigs)

Large enterprise (1893-4): [?] | [?] | [?] | 29 + 173 [324 sheep [47 pigs

Medium enterprise: 40.75 | III-11.5 IV-22.05 V-3.5 | 37.25 | [?] | 7 + 29 [19 pigs

Small enterprise: 8.0 | III-3.00 IV-1.75 V-2.00 | 7.75 | [?] | [?]

[Continuation of tables on following page]

[Continuation of tables begun on previous page]

Sale of grain, livestock, and milk | Income (in Mk) | Miscellaneous | Household | Sum (Total Income)

38.136
27.289
62.111
5.500 ("per Schloss-Konto")
133.489
+ 453*

Distillery
1.257
—
—
2.015
—
—
1.109

64.476 milk: 21.357
+
livestock 19.370
sheep: 6.455
Beets 46.114
potatoes + 1.457
Fruit in general 4.767
from lease 172.71/4
2.866
5.852 (= supplies)
5.574
4.050

Beets:
Rape and Clover: 11.066
198*
potatoes — 40
1.010
1.095
—
—
2.405

34.334 other grains + seeds 12.005
18.201 potatoes: 1.145
2.865 —
Shepherd utility revenue
from lease 68.667
3.584
livestock: 1.910
milk: 780
poultry: —
Potatoes: 504
Clover: 153
Pigs = 4.007
8.544
livestock: —
milk: —
pigs: —
Beets:
155 == Cucumbers and cabbage
1.478

* In Stumpfe these income figures (453, 198, and 530 marks) are shown in the article "in general" ("Income in general"). —Ed.

[Continuation of tables begun on previous pages]

Expenses
a) Taxes
a) Salary and
b) Insurance for
workers' wages
fire and
b) Daily wages
hail
Miscellaneous

Expenses
Expenses
Purchase of
a) Building repairs
a) Livestock
b) Travel expenses,
b) Feedstuffs
transport, postage
c) Artificial
c) In general
fertilizer

Total
Expenses
See reverse*

See reverse*
I Group*

a)
b) + 2.120
+
7.093
19.221
4.939
(Business necessities)
36.593
(Distillery)
a)
12.506
+
b)
11.175
+
c)
11.796
1.617
1.162
2.223
111.398

a
+
b
(Miscellaneous)
(Smith, saddler, cartwright)
a + b =
(Smith etc.)

a)
1.374
b) 1.084
a)
9.933
b)
24.725
c)
4.089
Worker sustenance
Miscellaneous: b2.355
for grain
purchase = 5.423
Steam plow
account = 2.530
a)
14.557
b)
24.552
c)
10.052
Shepherd expenses = 4.962
b) 1.111
420.350
c) 2.914

6.168 — Handworker wages
1.595
Heating costs
1.500
Firewood and
useful wood

a)
b)

a)
1.288
b)
2.238

a)
b)

a)
1.560

Seed
purchase:
a)
b)

General
expenses:
5.500

275 — Smith etc.
Miscellaneous: 65
a)
b)
c)

Smith
etc.: 54

5.505

5.536
13.228
Worker sustenance
2.836
Wood and coal
Miscellaneous: 661
Shepherd expenses: 445

a)
2.070
b)
5.320
c)
seeds: 177

a)
b)
c)
2.714

Handworker labor
38.298
+ 1.137

Worker sustenance

Handworker labor
Old age insurance =
a)
b)
c)

a) —
b) —
c) 770

Seeds: 147
4.633

General:
a)
b)
c)

Smith etc.

* This note ("t[ournez], s' i[l] v[ous] p[lait]") refers to the following (final) columns of the table (see pp. and of the present Collection). —Ed.

[Conclusion of tables begun on previous pages]

Profit (minus
compensation to owner)

Net Income
in marks

Same per hectare

22.091
– 1.500
20.591
36.72

Large enterprise

1.390
350 (!!)
1.040
50.12

Medium enterprise

I Group

" 300 (!!)
52.20

Small enterprise

52.364
– 1.500
50.864
118.40

Large enterprise

5.566
– – 5.116
99.32

Medium enterprise

II Group

1.602
– 1.152
135.58

Small enterprise

30.369
– 29.469
76.04

Large enterprise

3.911
– 3.461
84.02

Medium enterprise

III Group

1.068
– 89.72

Small enterprise

See tables A (Stumpfe)*

Notes to them.

No. 1. "The soil quality classification for it [the medium enterprise of Group I] could not be determined, but the arable land was almost exactly the same quality as on the manorial estate [large enterprise I], perhaps somewhat more uniform" (p. 63).

Regarding Group I, the author (who himself served — p. 66 — for two years as an official on this manorial estate and knows the village) says:

"If, proceeding from the high items of expenditure on feedstuffs and artificial fertilizer, as well as from the large labor expense account and taking into account the sandy nature of the soil, the farming of the manorial estate must be characterized as very intensive and undoubtedly stands fully at the level of contemporary practice, then of both peasant farms one must say the very opposite.

"They are still operated in almost every respect in the old-fashioned way, and production in terms of capital and labor must be characterized as extensive. Feedstuffs and fertilizer are not purchased at all, on the contrary, considerable quantities of straw are still sold, and especially rye and potatoes. Consequently, the replacement of nutrients is insufficient... As a result—poorer harvests and inadequate livestock.

"The stubbornness with which the peasants there still cling to their old habits is all the more incomprehensible in that the good example, which they have before their eyes daily, could spur them on to emulation. Recently, however, a turn for the better seems to be beginning here as well" (p. 61).

"Compensation for the owner's labor" is calculated for the large enterprise at 7,500 (the usual salary of a director!!): 5 (the owner has 5 estates!) = 1,500. For the medium enterprise — 350 ("customary payment in the region" (p. 64) for managing such a farm!). For the small enterprise — 300 ("the object!!! is half smaller than the previous one" p. 66).

The size of families is not indicated.

* See pp. 168 et seq. of the present Collection. —Ed.

Regarding Group II, Stumpfe notes that the farms are not entirely comparable, because on the large enterprise the land is better (the whole farm is "a pearl among Silesian estates" (p. 71), according to the opinion of a professor from Halle!!), and it is situated much better, only 1 mile from Breslau (the small farms — much farther away). And yet!! the small enterprise is exceedingly profitable!!!

Regarding the medium enterprise of Group II: "But the particular great advantage of peasant farming consists precisely in this, that the management of the farm lies entirely in the hands of the owner, and that work for one's own interests and out of one's own account will almost always be of better quality, more economical and profitable than work for the interests of other people" (p. 69)

"Compensation" for the small farm is 450 marks = (1) to the owner — 350 + (2) 100 marks to the parents of his wife, replacing "outside labor" (p. 72-3). [And cheaply they replace it!]

The medium enterprise, he says, also stands "at the level of contemporary practice" and in general is "impeccable," no worse than the large enterprise.

(detailed data on machines is lacking!!)

In the village there is a "cooperative dairy" and cooperative use of machines, cooperative purchase of fertilizers, etc.

Regarding Group III, we learn only that "the large enterprise is managed superbly" (p. 74). [The entire description of Group III is extremely superficial (pp. 74-77).]

Stumpfe's conclusion: "the smaller the holding, the larger the rent" (p. 77).

..."It is beyond doubt that on peasant farms where the owner properly attends to the progress of work or himself participates in it, both in qualitative and quantitative respects, work is conducted completely differently than on manorial estates—except perhaps quantitatively in piecework" (p. 78).

"...why, despite sometimes insignificant gross revenue, the net profit of small farms was nevertheless higher..." (78)

Group I. Revenue (in marks) from (p. 78)

Agriculture | Livestock use | In general | Sum
Sum per 1/4 ha | 1/4 ha | per 1/4 ha

Large enterprise: 63.652 – 28.37 | 27.289 – 12.18 | 773 – 0.34 | 91.715 – 40.89

Medium enterprise: 1.257 – 15.14 | 758 – 9.13 | — – — | 2.015 – 24.27

Small enterprise: 15.48 | 491 – 12.34 | — – — | 1.109 – 27.72

etc., etc., all the same

[The peasant can also greatly restrict himself in his household budget (80) etc.

!! Idem: p. 83 ("live within one's means")

He reasons that sugar beet and distillery production tend to separate from agriculture, etc., that the benefits are accessible to small enterprises as well through cooperatives (p. 85), etc. (Cf. David*—he repeats the same thing)

The machine does not play that role in agriculture. (Cf. David!)*

"It is in any case certain that the steam plow provides no reduction in production costs whatsoever" (87) (Cf. Benzing** and Fischer**)

The small farmer repairs [it] himself (!) (p. 92) and his implements last longer (p. 92) — ("Associated with this are undoubtedly the higher handworker wages of large enterprises (not because large enterprises pay more, but because) certain equipment, certain boards are thrown aside, which in the small enterprise would still find use for a long time (!) Altogether, this care in utilizing even the smallest objects, this ability thereby to reduce expenditures on all small current farm necessities to an absolute minimum, is an important characteristic advantage of small enterprises" (92)...

Social democracy threatens the countryside as well—there will be strikes, all this is much more dangerous for large enterprises (94).

Labor expenses are higher for the large landowner because he feeds entire worker families, while the small landowner—mostly unmarried workers, and although the small landowner feeds [them] better—"although the food of workers among peasants is considerably better and consequently more expensive than on manorial estates, this is offset on the other hand by a much greater work output of young, strong, well-nourished workers, and this fact weighs heavily, especially since the stimulating educational moment of the owner's preliminary and joint work must be rated very highly" (95).

"The entire labor system in large and small enterprises, at least in Silesia, is arranged in such a way that one absolutely cannot doubt the greater cheapness of labor in peasant farms" (p. 96).

—again the "stimulating effect" of the owner's and his children's work (p. 96). The "sustenance for farm servants" is better among peasants.

"Insurance for invalidity and old age is also a burden on large enterprises": Group II
[ Total: 490 marks | Large enterprise: 0.30 marks | Medium enterprise: 0.16 | Small enterprise: 0

(p. 101) "The gentlemen social democrats have gotten badly on the wrong track regarding agriculture"...

P. 102. Sering on colonization ("Labor force at the disposal of" landowners!!), —and "Large landownership cannot compete with the immense capital which these people (the colonists) have in their hands and legs" (Sering, cited p. 102).

P. 106: in commercial relations large enterprises are mostly superior, but cooperatives will help the peasant.

P. 108: peasants usually sell less advantageously, both grain and livestock [but, he says, this is offset by other things].

"It is not the German junker who is the enemy of the peasant; both have—setting aside inessential, more internally significant points of dispute—the same interests and the same enemies. This is a conviction which of late is forcing itself through with great vigor" (p. 115).

There he is—Stumpfe!

¹ The approximate date is established on the following basis. In the work "The Agrarian Question and the 'Critics of Marx,'" Lenin mentions Stumpfe's article only from Bulgakov's account (see Works, Vol. IV, p. 199).

[EXCERPTS AND NOTES ON THE PAMPHLET BY L. GRANDEAU "THE PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL SYNDICATES"]

[1902-1903]¹

L. Grandeau. Les progrès de l'agriculture et les syndicats agricoles. (Lecture of Feb. 27, [18]89) Paris 1889.

Small cultivation | Medium cultivation | Large cultivation
Landowners | Farms | Land

< 1 ha – 38.2
1-5: 32.8

< 5 ha: 71.4 – 11.3 || 13.5

5-10: 13.8
10-20: 7.8 and [illegible] 13.4 [illegible]

20-30: 3.5 9.5
30-40: 1.7 6.

>20: 7.4 – 61.4

40 and over: 2.6 43.

100.0 100.0 100.0

= 5,672,007
= 49,561,864 hectares.

P. 20. In France 110 million hectoliters of grain production: 15 million hectoliters sown (7:1) (formerly it was 6 hectoliters per hectare) 15 hectoliters per hectare (in England 28-29 hectoliters per hectare)

"With manuring and good selection of seeds one can double and sometimes (parfois) quintuple the harvest" (p. 21)—but for this an advance of capital from 80 to 200 francs per hectare is needed.

¹ Library catalog number. —Ed.
